commando

op link isn't working

wonder how many huskers will sign FA contracts?

carter, westerkamp, i think are certain

who else?

 

Walk me thru that Red ... when I read through your comments they seem to align to the fact that a President should not speak to a group of individuals that they potentially could help in their role as POTUS (i.e. pay for play - totally understand and agree with this). Nor should they speak after their presidency to any groups that they helped or may have "helped" (or perceived to have helped) during their time in office. After 8 years in that prime leadership position, touching all that they do wouldn't that pretty much mean they couldn't speak to any group?

It's not the speaking - it's the payment.

 

If I'm understanding correctly, the argument is entirely that perhaps Obama is collecting his reward for not going after bankers harder during his presidency.

Yes, but it's broader than that. Consider these thought experiments that are also unethical:

1) Trump builds a border wall. After his presidency he gets paid to give speeches to the trade association Border Walls 'R Us, whose members include companies that profited from the border wall.

2) Alternate universe where Bernie Sanders won the presidency and passes a law that makes unions powerful. After his presidency, he gets paid by the trade unions to give speeches.

 

Also consider the slippery slope that Obama getting money creates. Even if it wasn't a pay-for-play in Obama's case, it's an incentive for other political figures to do pay-for-play and allows industry figures to induce them to do so. For example, the firm that is paying Obama for a speech could go to Trump and intimate that he could get the same treatment if he treats them favorably.

 

trump would laugh at them if all they offer is $400,000. he is milking the taxpayers for millions now

he tries to drive the divide in our nation wider and wider with everything he does. not even giving fake words about unity. we need to get all the democrats and republicans out of office and replace them with a moderate party that wants to unite the nation and lead all of us instead of just the people with an R or a D by their names while running their brand of kleptocracy.

Brief But Revealing Conversations With People Who Emailed Me To Say ESPN Is Failing Because It's Liberal

 

ESPN is hemorrhaging money and laying off employees. This is because it is having trouble paying billions of dollars in rights fees while also losing millions of subscribers to cord-cutting. People cancel their cable subscriptions because advances in technology have allowed them to consume all the TV, movies, and sports they want without paying for cable, but a lot of morons out there want you to believe that people are cutting the cord because they have been alienated by ESPN’s supposedly liberal politics. Some of those morons emailed me.

 

holy chit.....those are some extreme far right nut jobs. i am amazed that they managed to find their way out of the birth canal.

seems that there might be a chance

is 1 of you who keeps bumping this thread actually Randy Gregory?

his career has gone up in smoke

damn...another thread devolved into beating that dead horse again

the walgreens on the corner on main street in fargo added a stock boy job....trump is bringing back jobs!!!

growth is slowest in 3 years....it's obamas fault!!!

 

 

Wait......

 

Fox does know that her own father thinks she's a good piece of ass and would love to have sex with her.....if he wasn't her father.....right????

 

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/857787981058461696

That is terrible for anyone to say. Messed up you would even think about saying something like that.

 

It's not terrible to say if it's true.

 

there is a right time and a right place to say things like that....on the evening news is neither the right time nor the right place. especially if your network is trying to recover from a sexual harassment case or 2.

thanks Obama

4 years to go....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uepFO4psgKE

i can believe it...as much as i don't want to.

The hits just keep coming for Fox News.

 

fox news is getting into some deep hot chocolate

 

 

He used that line with the travel ban, too.

 

Let's hope this has a similar outcome.

Wait...I thought it wasn't "a ban"?

 

This guy is a turd....

 

him calling it a "ban" is why it keeps failing in the courts.

Well....American lumber mills are probably very happy for this.

and now today trump signs EO to open federal lands for corporation benefits.

I imagine if Kim Jong Un tweeted, this is very similar to what he'd be saying.

kim jong is mature enough to not send those tweets sad

 

Yes. All the folks in rural areas coking meth will def decrease once the mexicans stop crossing. Cuz the meth and prescription opiods that are our problems now are most certainly coming from Mexico.

Canada about to make marijuana it's major export.

 

well...with the tariffs on lumber it may force Canada to find another revenue source...

Well....American lumber mills are probably very happy for this.

trump and his family probably bought a ton of stock in them before he imposed the tariffs

As someone enjoying the back and forth, I would just add this.

 

I have no problem with investigating things from either party that truly warrant it. But at a certain point, Congressional investigators become too partisan and blow their credibility.

 

It's hard as someone who leans left to hop on board with a Congressional investigation of much of anything led by the same clowns that gave us SEVEN committees on Benghazi. Nunes bowed out like a servile puppy dog when it was discovered he was trying to protect his guy in the House investigation. Their credibility is completely spent, and at a certain point they're just manufacturing controversy.

 

I wish we could trust Congressional inquiries and get them back to a serious, non-partisan nature.

 

Graham telling the Intel community to hurry up is rich. They're the only serious investigation we've got.

 

 

A House committee formed to investigate the 2012 attacks on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans had 46 staffers and eight interns.

The Senate Intelligence Committee’s years-long study of the CIA’s “enhanced” interrogation techniques during President George W. Bush’s administration had 20 staff members, according to the panel’s official report.

 

A special commission separate from Congress that reviewed the intelligence that wrongly concluded former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq involved 88 staffers.

 

A special Senate committee’s 1970s investigation into Watergate-era surveillance practices tapped 133 staffers.

 

A joint House-Senate probe of the 1980s Iran-Contra affair during Ronald Reagan’s presidency involving secret sales of arms to Iran to try to win the release of American hostages, with proceeds going to Nicaraguan rebels, had 181 staffers.

 

This Senate investigation? 7 staffers.

but they are the best staffers ever

this is good news

they are both extremely in the wrong. the biggest difference now is that trump has the majority support in both congress and the senate right now so don't expect anything serious to come from it.